The Big Picture: Conspiracy Weary

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT
 

arbane:

Hatchet90:
Geez, lay off Fox News. What, Democrats need every single news outlet?

So, you're going with the Liberal Biased Media conspiracy theory?

Kindly explain how Bush was ever taken seriously as a Presidential candidate, please. Or why his explanations for Why We Need To Invade Iraq RIGHTNOWNOWNOW weren't torn to bits by a mocking and skeptical Liberal Biased Media.

Sounds like someone needs a hug.

In order:

Bush lost the popular vote

The war was mocked

Doth:

Eric the Orange:

Doth:
Bob is dead wrong, again.

I think you missed the bit where it said this is an opinion show.

Because opinions can't be wrong? Don't think, petty please.

One person likes action movies, another does not. Are either of them wrong?

Hatchet90:

Sounds like someone needs a hug.

In order:

Bush lost the popular vote

The war was mocked

Not anywhere nearly hard enough.

The GOP has been cultivating the "LIBERAL BIASED MEDIA" meme since Reagan, to the point that for quite a while they could make the corporate media (who like to think they're REALLY Fair And Balanced(tm)) swallow practically anything if they just whined hard enough about how BIASED those mean ol' reporters were.

Unfortunately for them, it seems like most non-Fox media are getting close to their Republican Bullshit Saturation Level, but that's still not the same thing as Liberal Bias.

well put bob critical sense is the most important tool we have, however its important to not dismiss everything even if you have put alot of thought into it. like the cause of the current financial situation seems to testify humans are greedy, very greedy or how about companies like enron exploit situations like the california blackouts. while it is important to be able to dismiss illogical ideas, its equally important not to expect the best quality's within humanity. everyone is a douche until proven otherwise....im not a big fan of reality either

As usual late to the party. To get off the topic of conspiracy for two minutes. I found what Bob was saying before the conspiracy theory part more interesting. Basically because it is the conclusion about reality that I buy into, and have for a while. And it sparked in me this question. If the Universe is completely random and bad stuff happens to good people and nothing to bad people. I.E bad people don't get punished. Why be good?

Back on topic. Thanks for this vid Bob as my bro is always being convinced by these theories and I also always argue the same points you just made. Our leaders are not evil just idiots. Since my bro respects you, maybe you will have better luck convincing him.....

I still don't believe global warming, well, in the sense that they say. There is global warming 6 months out of the year and the other 6 is global cooling. I have many reasons for why it is stupid, but ehh, not the point right now... awesome video too.

Lizardbob will haunt my dreams... Always.

shogunblade:

But, he also watches Glenn Beck, which means he can only have truths to some truths, which means most things can't be true and the rantings of some loudmouth on the world's most powerful network has too....

Fox News is far from the world's most powerful network.

That belongs to Disney Channel.

BOW BEFORE HANNAH MONTANA!

Global warming does strike me as a conspiracy based upon the setup Bob made.

"The earth isn't getting warmer because of the planet's orbital movement slightly shifting. No, it's man! Man is warming the planet!"

Doesn't that sound more like the chaos we can control than attempting to change the direction of a planet?

That isn't to say being environmentally conscious is a bad thing. I was an environmentalist when it wasn't cool the first time (before Al Gore made it even less cool) But be an environmentalist because it's the right thing to do, not because you think you're going to stop global warming.

i agree bob; reality sucks.
shame most of the amasing things made from poeples imaginations arnt.

Doth:

Congratulations, you loose.
Protip: When acting like a smartass, being smart helps.

Now now, there's no reason to be mean. It is OK to make your point without resorting to insults.

Now I believe that the conflict here is one of definitions. I would not define the belief of earth being flat as an opinion. They believe it as a fact. Now weather this fact is right or wrong can be debated, but I wouldn't say it's an opinion.

So for example I believe that 2+2=4, But I would not say that I am of the opinion that 2+2=4. Now weather I'm right or wrong can be debated but I believe this as fact.

Warachia:

Tin Man:

Warachia:

You obviously misunderstood me, nobody is forcing anybody to watch anything, but it's poor taste for anybody to come out and say, look people, I'm right, you're wrong, now think like me.

Its a good thing I find irony delicious.

In all fairness dude, if you don't like that kind of thing, don't watch the show. The whole, heavily opinionated, well spoken geek thing is hardly a new angle of Escapist shows. Some of us are comfortable enough in our own opinions to not get bothered by other peoples, and find them quite entertaining, if not thought provoking.

If you don't, then that's cool, but don't sit there being hypocritical and speaking for other people while you're at it.

Much love.

I also love when others make my argument, if you don't like my comment, don't reply, there is nothing forcing you to do so, and like I said earlier, I don't mind learning the opinions of others, it is thought provoking, and entertaining, which is the sole reason I watch this show, I also thought some people appreciate feedback on what people thought of their most recent show, but you have shown me that an honest comment is to be treated harshly.

Also, I fail to see any irony in my post.

If you think I was being harsh my friend, you would do well to get toughened up.

I haven't read a post of yours saying anything to suggest you "don't mind learning the opinions of others, it is thought provoking, and entertaining". Not saying you haven't said it, but its not been in this chain, and I don't have anywhere near enough spare time to nerd it through 10 pages of this shit just to understand your flippant attitudes to this show. Sorry.

But yeah, I didn't make your argument... Your argument was that... Oh fuck it, this is the internet and you won't listen anyway, you don't even understand how trying actively to convert me to your point of view, while decrying trying to convert people is ironic. I don't care enough at this point.

Good day sir.

I figured out that shit happens when I was 10, honestly conspiracy theories make me laugh some times.

Tin Man:

Warachia:

Tin Man:

Its a good thing I find irony delicious.

In all fairness dude, if you don't like that kind of thing, don't watch the show. The whole, heavily opinionated, well spoken geek thing is hardly a new angle of Escapist shows. Some of us are comfortable enough in our own opinions to not get bothered by other peoples, and find them quite entertaining, if not thought provoking.

If you don't, then that's cool, but don't sit there being hypocritical and speaking for other people while you're at it.

Much love.

I also love when others make my argument, if you don't like my comment, don't reply, there is nothing forcing you to do so, and like I said earlier, I don't mind learning the opinions of others, it is thought provoking, and entertaining, which is the sole reason I watch this show, I also thought some people appreciate feedback on what people thought of their most recent show, but you have shown me that an honest comment is to be treated harshly.

Also, I fail to see any irony in my post.

If you think I was being harsh my friend, you would do well to get toughened up.

I haven't read a post of yours saying anything to suggest you "don't mind learning the opinions of others, it is thought provoking, and entertaining". Not saying you haven't said it, but its not been in this chain, and I don't have anywhere near enough spare time to nerd it through 10 pages of this shit just to understand your flippant attitudes to this show. Sorry.

But yeah, I didn't make your argument... Your argument was that... Oh fuck it, this is the internet and you won't listen anyway, you don't even understand how trying actively to convert me to your point of view, while decrying trying to convert people is ironic. I don't care enough at this point.

Good day sir.

I'm not trying to "convert" you or anybody else here, I am trying to understand you, which is tough as you are a person who can't see past their own personal interpretations.

Despite what you might think, I look forward to what people honestly have to say on the internet, I listen to arguments, and will give thought to any good points made by others, I have no idea why you started this argument, so I will take a new look at it.

I gave a feedback to why some people don't like one individual, you added a comment along the lines of "nobody forced you to watch this", I explained myself, you found this ironic, something I don't understand, and called me a hypocrite, stating the "don't like, don't watch" argument, to which I replied there is nothing forcing you to read my comment and reply, and gave my reasons again for watching the show and giving feedback, to which you stopped giving a shit. Now we are here.

A few things you don't get, there are different ways to treat something harshly, being misunderstood by someone who can't see past their own perspective IS the harshest way to be treated because there is no way for them to know what you are talking about.

I never once said in my argument that somebody should or should not do something, I never once said something was concrete and that people who though otherwise were wrong, and I never once tried to make others think like me, I only try to get them to see both sides of the argument, something that is sadly lost on you.

MovieBob:
Conspiracy Weary

This week, Bob uncovers what's really going on, and welcomes our new reptilian overlords.

Watch Video

I very much agree with everything you said in this episode, MovieBob. I just have some things to ask and say.

First off, the conspiracy that Obama is from Kenya. I too believe that he was born in Hawaii, and thus, was born in the United States. It's just, if the conspiratists are only making it up because they're afraid of what the truth is, what is the truth behind their fear of Obama? My opinion is that Obama symbolizes from my point of view, that the country is moving towards the center left in the political spectrum somewhat, and that many of the conspiratists feel the same way. That the "Regan era" of politics is either at the end or nearing it's end of political dominance in American politics.

This is largely due to that the incoming Echo boomer voting block is much more center left, at least in terms of social issues than center right, and that the growing hispanic vote is becoming more important, which the majority of their voting block usually votes Democrat. And that these two eventual voting blocks will become more influential in American politics in the years to come, espcially in the next decade, as the Baby boomer voting block which is more center right, begins to retire and so on. Not that conservatives and Republicans can make a comeback though. But only if they try to sometime in the near future, to become more appealing to Echo boomers. Of which, I think they'd be more along the lines of Megan McCain's thinking and not Sarah Palin. Oh, and Michael Steele adopting street talk isn't most likely going to help.

The only other reason I think they're afraid of him is maybe slightly a bit racial. Now, before I get any angry responses by right or right-leaning people that don't believe that those who make conspiracy's about Obama are trying to tell me that they're not racist, I say I don't think they're racist either to be quite honest. I don't think they really hate hispanics or blacks or whatever. The point I'm going to make is that because America's becoming a country that's liking the idea of multiculturalism more and mixing races, and that blacks and hispanics are populating more faster than whites, probably scares some whites in America a bit. Espcially those who probably live in the south or are more conservative in their political leanings. That they worry about themselves becoming the minority, as the dominant white chiristian male era of sorts in America weakens. This their importantance in American leadership and political power, lessens.

Ok, and now for the second thing.

It was at the beginning when you said the world is of chaos. And you showed Rupert Murdock's picture when you said, "Bad people are met with success." Now, I'm pretty sure by that, you're talking about that because he's the owner of News Corp, and due that Fox News is owned by News Corp, and since Fox News more or less acts like a conservative blowhorn by the right that tries say it's fair and balanced, that it makes him the bad guy. Right? Well, while I do believe Fox News is a very biased news organization that's not honest about what it's selling to the viewers, I think it's more at it's president Roger Ailes fault and not Rupert. Ailes has been pretty much seen and considered to be as right wing as they come in politics. That even he is more towards the right than Glenn Beck. Heck, one time I heard on either CNN or MSNBC that one time when Obama met with Murdock and Ailes, Murdock quite liked Obama and Ailes on the other hand had a dislike of him.

I believe that Ailes is making trouble for Fox News by making it take a very sharp turn to the right, by putting on too much conservative opinion programming and no liberal opinion shows or straight news programming to counter balance it. The only fault Murdock has is not doing anything about it, as it seems as if he'll allow it as long as it's making a profit and he's able to laugh all his way to the bank. Besides, if Murdock really was out to get rid of liberal viewpoints or liberal programming, he would of had cancled the Simpsons long ago, he would of never let Family Guy get renewed, and he wouldn't let the film Avatar be made. Still, personally, I don't think Fox News maybe able to pull off what it's doing for too long. I do think sometime within this decade, something will happen that will probably cause Fox News to hit a low point. To loose viewers and ratings. Mostly liking due to one of their very opinionated and extreme people like Beck or O'Reilly, finally doing or saying something out of line, that no amount of blaming the left will work and it will hurt their careers, thus causing program cancelations and lower ratings. Something I think is needed, even though I fear it will hurt those at the network who are good newspeople, like Shepard Smith.

Anyways, great episode MovieBob.

ReiverCorrupter:

Drake_Dercon:

ker-snip

ReiverCorrupter:

Not to be a pedant, but that's technically inductive reasoning.

Granted, but that was my seventh grade science experiment. A simple test to show the principle. Frankly, based on my findings, I'd rather minimize my own impact than take the risk of damaging life on the planet (I wouldn't go so far as to say killing life in general or even just us, as life in general has survived worse and we certainly can). My reasoning is fairly philosophical in what is a scientific issue here, so I won't go into it unless asked.

ReiverCorrupter:

To anyone who criticizes a scientific theory for not being proven... gravity isn't proven. In fact, there isn't a single thing in science that is proven. That's why they're called theories. However, for something to even become a theory it has to tested rather extensively, so it's not so easily dismissed.

That's not entirely true, some basic concepts have been proven beyond any doubt. For instance, the existence of cells, the fact that a ind can be conditioned, mostly psychology and biology. Though that's really fairly irrelevant here. I'd like to say that climate change is among the more tested theories and it's one that's more likely to be true. Again, not being cautious becomes an unwise risk to take.

ReiverCorrupter:

Devil's advocate: We don't understand the weather system all that well, it's VERY complicated.

Counterpoint: it is more or less a non-debatable fact that we are throwing C02 and other greenhouse gasses into the air. However, our prediction about the affects of this are more based upon an understanding of chemistry than meteorology or climatology. (Kind of like your experiment.)

But it is another straightforward and almost non-debatable fact that we are MASSIVELY loosing biodiversity, which is bad for several reasons.

I haven't heard of anything really proving either side definitively, however, we are not helping matters. It's not just C02 remember, there's also a lot of artificial greenhouse gasses that we produce, which couldn't possibly be part of the earth's natural cycle.

Since you're both so big on rational argumentation, here's an argument from prudential ethics:

Which is worse,

the greatest possible evil associated with global warming (possible destruction of much of society, even the death of the planet if the oxygen-producing plankton get wiped out),

or

the greatest possible evil associated with us being wrong (industry takes a hit and the economy suffers, possibly leading to a great depression)?

Right, the important part. See, I'm better at waffling through things without ever getting to the actual point, so I'm going to insult this rather than respond to it.
No.

Weather system: We understand it fairly well, just not as well as other things, so there is a fairly wide margin of error.

It also stands to reason that increased carbon dioxide (refuse to write CO2 to refer to it because the notation makes no scientific sense and you can't get subscript here) will increase temperature, and based on what we do know of meteorology, we can guess (not beyond any doubt, but beyond a reasonable one) what will be affected worse if we persist. It doesn't look pretty.

Then the other gasses that never were there... yeah, that makes it even worse.

Honestly, it's fix it now or wait twenty years to see if the hypothesis is proven. I have to take the unscientific route here, unfortunately.

And as for your moral question:

Economic collapse. Any day. Society has gotten fat and lazy, perhaps a shake-up (even if it shoves me and others below the poor bracket) is what we need. It would at least make things interesting for a couple decades. But that's philosophy again.

My point is essentially, it's an unnecessary and unwise gamble to take. I'd prefer to fix things up before they get worse. And they can get worse.

someone wasn't very nice to you in life were they.....

Sh*t happens, but sometimes, every once in a while, good sh*t happens.

As much as i try to believe it, i don't think their is a single person in this world who didn't start out trying to do somthing good. The road to hell is paved with good intentions....

That being said, you were pretty much spot on with this post :)

The secondary title is kind of misleading since you didn't mention Alex Jones or the 911 movement.

Ahh Bob I do so enjoy your stuff. I do wish though that you wouldn't let your clear Liberal nature shine though so much. But hey, you're right it is an opinion show.

I mean how many times are you going to use Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck as your poster people for Idiots. Surely you can be fair and find some Left wing people who you can say are idiots as well!

Other then that, the only thing I have to net pick is that why yes I don't think the Governator did that censor on Video Games for the Movie Indsustry aka Hollywood. I do think coming from the Guy who made his carrer on shooting or slicing up people! That saying VG violence is hurtful is being Hypocritical.

Well...I also doubt that its all a conspiracy. Its unrealistic for me to think that humans don't react to situations and that life is complete organisation. However, the game is chess....not checkers. To believe a government doesnt wager all options and prepare for the worst, and plan to succeed in reaction is unrealistic aswell.

Evidence and logic make or break a conspiracy to me, and where the actual truth chain ends...only some may know for sure.

Drake_Dercon:

Honestly, it's fix it now or wait twenty years to see if the hypothesis is proven. I have to take the unscientific route here, unfortunately.

We've already done that.

Bush the Elder's administration was ALL about the "Further Study" whenever the DFH Brigade started whining about global warming.

arbane:

Drake_Dercon:

Honestly, it's fix it now or wait twenty years to see if the hypothesis is proven. I have to take the unscientific route here, unfortunately.

We've already done that.

Bush the Elder's administration was ALL about the "Further Study" whenever the DFH Brigade started whining about global warming.

The scientific route isn't taken until we've proven that everyone dies.

Or we can just fix it and have done with this.

Green day sez: "It's not over 'til you're underground" (sorry, it just seemed to fit).

The thing is there have been REAL conspiracies in the past:

1763 Native Americans intentionally given blankets contaminated with smallpox
1919 Black Sox World Series "fix"
1932 GM streetcar
1933 Smedley Butler's attempted coup against FDR; Reichstag fire aftermath in Germany
1956-1958 TV Quiz shows being rigged
1953-1975 MKULTRA - CIA's testing of LSD on US citizen's often without their knowledge or consent.
1962 Operation Northwoods
1972 Watergate
1981-1986 Iran-Contra
1980s/1990s-2009 Bernard Madoff
2001 Enron and Arther Anderson

These are all REAL conspiracies that ACTUALLY HAPPENED. NO ONE CAN DENY THEY EXISTED. Note that some of these went on for a DECADE or longer.

It is impossible to take a video dismissing conspiracies that does not admit that they DO happen seriously when such real worlds examples of conspiracies are easily found.

[quote="maximara" post="6.258004.9737539"]1933 Smedley Butler's attempted coup against FDR quote]During the "business plot" pro fascist U.S. industrialists(read: capitalists) approached (I don't know if he was retired by this time) Marine general Smedley Butler to act as a figurehead in their coup against FDR. He gave them the middle finger and revealed the plot because he was "Tired of being a gangster for capitalism."

Ritter315:
"Governed by an idiot." - most people, including you Bob, has been monsterously unfair to George Bush,

I fully agree-we have been TERRIBLY unfair to Bush.

Unfortunately, I don't have the authority to drag his corrupt torturemonkey ass in front of the war-crimes tribunal he's EARNED, and the people who do are either unindicted accomplices or utterly spineless.

Ritter315:
Also, while its true everything tends toward choas, this doesnt mean choas dominates life on earth. Yes, shit happens. However, shit often happens for a reason, and while this doesnt make much sense from an individual perspective, puzzle-pieces often match in history (History doesnt repeat, it rhymes)

As a Discordian, I have to disagree. It's pretty obvious that the world is filled with chaos, and I personally take a great deal of comfort in the inherent randomness and unfairness of the universe, even if it means that Molly Ivins is dead and Glenn Beck isn't.

Ritter315:

(FDR didnt do almost nothing that actually improved the state of the economic during the Depression, only the mobilzation of the armed forces in WWII did that)

"didnt do almost nothing"... GRAMMAR, MOTHER****ER, DO YOU SPEAK IT?!

I don't care if FDR's policies didn't 'help the economy', they KEPT PEOPLE FROM STARVING OR RIOTING. Most people who aren't Republicans or sociopaths would think that is a GOOD thing.

(Global warming BLUH snipped. Been over this already, bored now. Reality is not determined by a majority vote.)

ReiverCorrupter:
Since you're both so big on rational argumentation, here's an argument from prudential ethics:

Which is worse,

the greatest possible evil associated with global warming (possible destruction of much of society, even the death of the planet if the oxygen-producing plankton get wiped out),

or

the greatest possible evil associated with us being wrong (industry takes a hit and the economy suffers, possibly leading to a great depression)?

Hah. Reminds me of a button I saw once: "The ozone layer, or cheese in a spray can? DON'T MAKE ME CHOOSE."

Humans are good at a lot of things, but long-term planning is NOT one of them.[/quote]

Ok, war-crimes tribunal? George Bush isnt a war criminal. Want to see war-crimes unpunished? Look at Castro: Admitted to his government throwing homosexuals in concentration camps, and university students preaching about marxism and wearing Che Guevara T-shirts. Bush isnt even on the list. What I ment was the uncanny likeness to Herbert Hoover, someone who only is known as a bad president essentially for being unlucky.
Indeed though, the world tends towards choas. Now does this mean the world is BUILT on choas, no it isnt. And really? Glenn Beck NOT being dead is NOT unfair. He's essentially the Conservative Jon Stewart, yet no serious conservative would ever call Jon for death would they? I certainly dont.

GRAMMAR, MOTHER****ER, DO YOU SPEAK IT?!" - Yes, even if its second-hand (ESL man) Seriously, usually grammer is qualified, when its being typed by a native english-speaker. I am not one of them. (Spanish is my first language, even if I'm a bit rusty in it nowadays)
And FDR's policies kept people from starving? Herbert Hoovers did as well. Neither one actually affect the state of the economy, as in it didnt get better. And there was rioting in Hoover's presidency because of opprotunistic political groups (Not counting the bonus army of course) FDR's presidency was more popular, even though it REALLY didnt help much at all.

Also sorry, still havent got the quote splicing figured out yet.

This is probably a lie...But in my country(Lithuania)Theres was a riot about 1-2 years ago(cant remember)and it was started by some criminals(that supesedly belong to a gang)so that they cud rob some stuff while all the police were bussy with the riot....They were cought the same day while in act......Hum....There was a video where 2 people with masks that threw rocks at the goverment buliding and styarted a riot......hum......

Good episode, but it is possible that ONE conspiracy theory of all the conspiracy theories out there could possibly be true.

9/11 was caused by a two fucking passenger jets.
"Wake up sheeple." >_>

Nothing more to say to that, still ashamed that loose change was even given so much as the time of day. Not to mention the sheer amount of disrespect in claiming all those dead firefighters were "in on it" or that the phone calls from the passengers to their families were "hurr hurr fake".

Cursed Frogurt:
Global warming is real. Whether or not we are significantly affecting it is the debate.

Conspiracy theories are stupid. Personal agendas should always be considered.

Pff nah uh. It snowed today AND it's below freezing, that means global warming is unequivocally proven false.

The moon landing was faked though to just sorta wave our big red, white, and blue junk at Russia and Cheney is Satan in disguise, not a Specter agent, silly Bob.

I disagree with you immensely on certain topics you brought up but as you said it's an opinion show so voice it away.

Really good episode. And yes, reality is pretty frightening sometimes, but personally I just find conspiration theoriest to be funny and silly.

Drake_Dercon:

...

ReiverCorrupter:

To anyone who criticizes a scientific theory for not being proven... gravity isn't proven. In fact, there isn't a single thing in science that is proven. That's why they're called theories. However, for something to even become a theory it has to tested rather extensively, so it's not so easily dismissed.

That's not entirely true, some basic concepts have been proven beyond any doubt. For instance, the existence of cells, the fact that a ind can be conditioned, mostly psychology and biology. Though that's really fairly irrelevant here. I'd like to say that climate change is among the more tested theories and it's one that's more likely to be true. Again, not being cautious becomes an unwise risk to take.

...

Right, the important part. See, I'm better at waffling through things without ever getting to the actual point, so I'm going to insult this rather than respond to it.
No.

Weather system: We understand it fairly well, just not as well as other things, so there is a fairly wide margin of error.

It also stands to reason that increased carbon dioxide (refuse to write CO2 to refer to it because the notation makes no scientific sense and you can't get subscript here) will increase temperature, and based on what we do know of meteorology, we can guess (not beyond any doubt, but beyond a reasonable one) what will be affected worse if we persist. It doesn't look pretty.

Then the other gasses that never were there... yeah, that makes it even worse.

Honestly, it's fix it now or wait twenty years to see if the hypothesis is proven. I have to take the unscientific route here, unfortunately.

And as for your moral question:

Economic collapse. Any day. Society has gotten fat and lazy, perhaps a shake-up (even if it shoves me and others below the poor bracket) is what we need. It would at least make things interesting for a couple decades. But that's philosophy again.

My point is essentially, it's an unnecessary and unwise gamble to take. I'd prefer to fix things up before they get worse. And they can get worse.

I more or less agree. Though I would point out that

1) My main point about theories was that the term 'theory' does not signify uncertainty in scientific academia like it does in general language. I think I came off as more skeptical than I intended, as I certainly acknowledge that the existence of cells etc. has more or less been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Of course, generally speaking that is no longer considered a theory, and is more like a law. Although, even laws can be doubted (not in whether they describe something that does happen, but whether they quite explain what is happening, i.e. Newton's law of gravity). But then again, this doesn't boil down to the theory being 'wrong', but in not quite being nuanced enough.

2) In terms of the weather: it's emergent complexity. Emergent complexity is always very difficult for us to deal with because it doesn't break down into isolate-able parts that can be studied separately. It also doesn't lend itself to scientific experimentation because the forces at work can't be put into a lab with controls, and indeed the very placement of controls could affect the emergent complexity. This is why we aren't able to understand the brain by simply looking at one neuron, and is why neuroscience in general progresses more slowly than biology does. We understand how certain weather phenomena work (e.g. what causes a hurricane), but I'm not sure if we can say we understand the entire weather system of the planet, which is really the point at issue. There's just too many factors and it's really difficult to test. Though I do agree that it isn't reasonable to ignore our impact and say climate change is probably natural when 1) there is so much at stake, and 2) we know the chemical effects of the stuff we produce, that couldn't possibly be part of the natural cycle.

3) I largely agree with your stance on the ethical argument. It seems to me that it's sheer laziness on our part on not wanting to switch over from fossil fuels. Not only that, but oil has a lot of other important uses (polymers, plastics, etc.). I think it would be a huge boon to American industry if we made the shift. Right now we're moving into becoming a service based economy, which is crap. We were powerful when we made stuff. We still make some computers and what not, but I don't see how we can stay on top economically by just having a service industry. There's really no reason to switch over other than temporary inconvenience, and the people in the oil industry loosing money. Not only that, but we could stop giving a crap about the middle east, and can just let them flounder in their own religious fanaticism. But everyone tends to be shortsighted.

4) About Bush: Great president? No friggin' way. War criminal? Maybe a little. But he's nothing compared to Lincoln, who suspended the writ of Habeas Corpus, ordered mass executions, ordered a scorched earth policy against civilian targets and even denied the Confederate's request that union doctors come to take care of the union prisoners because he thought it would be better to let union prisoners die of disease if it helped to strain the confederacy's resources. Now he's worshiped as a hero as the freer of the slaves. (Which is even funnier because he offered seceding states slavery in perpetuity if they rejoined the union on multiple occasions.) He did things one hundred times worse than Bush (granted he also had more reason to) and he's considered a hero, so what are the chances anything will happen to Bush besides him being paid $100,000 an hour on the lecture circuit?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here